OPTIMIZATION OF GROUND CONTROL POINT (GCP) CONFIGURATION FOR UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE (UAV) SURVEY USING STRUCTURE FROM MOTION (SFM)

57 citations as recorded by crossref.

1. Optimization of the number and position of ground control point configured for UAV survey S. Stojković & B. Obrenović https://doi.org/10.5937/tehnika2106731S
2. New Concept of Smart UAS-GCP: A Tool for Precise Positioning in Remote-Sensing Applications N. Famiglietti et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/drones8040123
3. Crop height estimation based on UAV images: Methods, errors, and strategies T. Xie et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2021.106155
4. Constructing a Corrected Stations Network Using Some Geomatic Techniques A. Ali et al. https://doi.org/10.2478/cee-2024-0007
5. Improving UAV‐SfM photogrammetry for modelling high‐relief terrain: Image collection strategies and ground control quantity W. Dai et al. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.5665
6. Pre‐dam valley reconstruction based on archival spatial data sources: Methods, accuracy, and 3D printing possibilities J. Pacina et al. https://doi.org/10.1111/tgis.12854
7. Application and Accuracy of Unmanned Aerial Survey Imagery after Salvage Logging in Different Terrain Conditions A. Đuka et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/f13122054
8. Optimization of Number of GCPs and Placement Strategy for UAV-Based Orthophoto Production D. Seo et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14083163
9. Enhancing Efficiency while Maintaining Accuracy in Repeated Coastal Drone Monitoring through the Use of Fixed Structures as Ground Control Points H. Noh et al. https://doi.org/10.9765/KSCOE.2025.37.1.1
10. An Improved Ground Control Point Configuration for Digital Surface Model Construction in a Coal Waste Dump Using an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle System H. Ren et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12101623
11. Photogrammetry (SfM) vs. Terrestrial Laser Scanning (TLS) for Archaeological Excavations: Mosaic of Cantillana (Spain) as a Case Study C. Marín-Buzón et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/app112411994
12. Recent (2018–2021) glaciological, hydrological and geomorphological landscape changes of Hailuogou Glacier tongue, southeastern Tibetan Plateau S. Xu et al. https://doi.org/10.1080/17445647.2022.2147029
13. A Database for Second World War Military Landscapes in Sardinia: Toward an Integrative Strategy of Knowledge, Representation, and Adaptive Reuse G. Sanna et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/architecture5030060
14. High-Quality UAV-Based Orthophotos for Cadastral Mapping: Guidance for Optimal Flight Configurations C. Stöcker et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12213625
15. Precise LULC classification of rural area combining elevational and reflectance characteristics using UAV K. Zhang et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sciaf.2024.e02431
16. UAV Platforms and the SfM-MVS Approach in the 3D Surveys and Modelling: A Review in the Cultural Heritage Field M. Pepe et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/app122412886
17. Use of gis technologies for geodesic assessment of land resources and cadastral activities I. Rozhi & B. Naradoviy https://doi.org/10.31548/zemleustriy2023.04.04
18. Real-time unmanned aerial vehicle surveying using spatial criteria: a simulated study D. Chatziparaschis & P. Partsinevelos https://doi.org/10.1117/1.JRS.17.014519
19. ENRICH: Multi-purposE dataset for beNchmaRking In Computer vision and pHotogrammetry D. Marelli et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2023.03.002
20. A Systematic Review on the Advancements in Remote Sensing and Proximity Tools for Grapevine Disease Detection F. Portela et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/s24248172
21. Performance Analysis of a Drone Development Kit-derived Digital Elevation Model M. Doğruluk & İ. Yalçın https://doi.org/10.30897/ijegeo.1344526
22. Using images obtained from UAVs to construct a DEM of riverbed territories with complex hydromorphological characteristics K. Burshtynska et al. https://doi.org/10.23939/istcgcap2022.95.053
23. UAS-Based Photogrammetric Assessment of Geomorphological Changes Along the Lilas River (Evia Island, Central Greece) After the August 2020 Flood N. Spyrou et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/app16031456
24. Estimating potential surface water storage and captured sediment volumes in peatland restoration sites using drones M. Wilson https://doi.org/10.1139/dsa-2024-0056
25. Improving Urban Mapping Accuracy: Investigating the Role of Data Acquisition Methods and SfM Processing Modes in UAS-Based Survey Through Explainable AI Metrics L. Nagy et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41651-024-00179-z
26. Investigating Geomorphic Change Using a Structure from Motion Elevation Model Created from Historical Aerial Imagery: A Case Study in Northern Lake Michigan, USA J. DeWitt & F. Ashland https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi12040173
27. Spatial Analysis of Intra-Annual Reed Ecosystem Dynamics at Lake Neusiedl Using RGB Drone Imagery and Deep Learning C. Buchsteiner et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15163961
28. Evaluation of the effectiveness of implementing measures to preserve natural resources in the context of sustainable development V. Khryk et al. https://doi.org/10.31548/dopovidi/3.2024.106
29. Enhancing Direct Georeferencing Using Real-Time Kinematic UAVs and Structure from Motion-Based Photogrammetry for Large-Scale Infrastructure S. Han & D. Han https://doi.org/10.3390/drones8120736
30. Enhancing village-level spatial planning with unmanned aerial vehicles: A comparative study of direct georeferencing and ground control points G. Prabowo et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12518-025-00682-y
31. SfM Photogrammetric Techniques Applied in the Building Archaeology Works of the Old Cloister of the Monastery of San Francisco from the 16th Century (Cazalla de la Sierra, Seville) M. León-Bonillo et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage5040201
32. International exchange of geospatial information and cooperation in the field of land castras V. Goi et al. https://doi.org/10.36887/2415-8453-2024-1-36
33. A UAV Vision-Based Deformation Monitoring Method with 3D Scale Constraints J. Liu et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/s25247418
34. Applicability of High-Resolution Geospatial Data Obtained by UAV Photogrammetry to Develop Drainage System Models for Pluvial Flood Analysis K. Park et al. https://doi.org/10.20965/jdr.2021.p0371
35. A New Method for High Resolution Surface Change Detection: Data Collection and Validation of Measurements from UAS at the Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, USA B. Crawford et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/drones5020025
36. Validation of the positional accuracy of products resulting from the digital processing of UAV images L. Silva et al. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v26n8p624-630
37. UAV Photogrammetry for Soil Surface Deformation Detection in a Timber Harvesting Area, South Korea J. Kim et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14050980
38. INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE AND STANDARDS OF LAND VALUATION AND THEIR IMPACT ON THE LAND PLOTS MARKET PRICE I. Udovenko et al. https://doi.org/10.33042/2522-1809-2024-1-182-151-158
39. Investigation of the effect of height difference and geometry of GCP on position accuracy of point cloud in UAV photogrammetry K. Hastaoglu et al. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396265.2022.2097998
40. Quantifying the Reliability of Volumetric and Areal Calculation with UAV-Generated DEMs: A Comparative Study with Ground Truth Data A. Hussein & S. Salih https://doi.org/10.25130/tjes.31.1.5
41. Combining Interior Orientation Variables to Predict the Accuracy of Rpas–Sfm 3D Models A. Capolupo et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12172674
42. Optimization of Ground Control Point Distribution for Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Photogrammetry for Inaccessible Fields K. Zhang et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159505
43. An Automatic and Accurate Method for Marking Ground Control Points in Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Photogrammetry L. Kong et al. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTARS.2022.3224543
44. Three-Dimensional Analysis of the Photogrammetric Methods PPK, DRTK2 and DRTK + GCP M. Ndour et al. https://doi.org/10.4236/ijg.2025.1612047
45. CREATING A SCALE PLANE IN GIS USING UAV DATA M. Altyntsev et al. https://doi.org/10.33764/2618-981X-2020-1-1-86-92
46. Direct Georeferencing UAV-SfM in High-Relief Topography: Accuracy Assessment and Alternative Ground Control Strategies along Steep Inaccessible Rock Slopes P. Nesbit et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14030490
47. Surveying coastal cliffs using two UAV platforms (multirotor and fixed-wing) and three different approaches for the estimation of volumetric changes Á. Gómez-Gutiérrez & G. Gonçalves https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2020.1752950
48. Deep learning-based Scalable Image-to-3D Facade Parser for generating thermal 3D building models Y. Yu et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2025.106449
49. Creation of high-precision digital elevation models using the GNSS UAV A. Gafurov et al. https://doi.org/10.35595/2414-9179-2021-2-27-327-339
50. Considerations and tradeoffs of UAS-based coastal wetland monitoring in the Southeastern United States A. DiGiacomo et al. https://doi.org/10.3389/frsen.2022.924969
51. Ortho-3DGS: True Digital Orthophoto Generation From Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Imagery Using the Depth-Regulated 3D Gaussian Splatting J. Yang et al. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTARS.2025.3552105
52. Hydrological Modeling for Determining Flooded Land from Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Images—Case Study at the Dniester River K. Burshtynska et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15041071
53. Digital surface models derived from historical aerial imagery in highly anthropized areas applied to active fault studies (eastern Betics, Spain) J. Molins-Vigatà et al. https://doi.org/10.1344/GeologicaActa2026.24.5
54. Influence of quantity, quality, horizontal and vertical distribution of ground control points on the positional accuracy of UAV survey D. D S et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12518-023-00531-w
55. Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles for Monitoring Pastures and Forages in Agricultural Sciences: A Systematic Review W. Santos et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/drones8100585
56. Influence of ground control point reliability and distribution on UAV photogrammetric 3D mapping accuracy H. Zhong et al. https://doi.org/10.1080/10095020.2025.2451204
57. Estimating along-strike variation of off-fault deformation for the 2018 Mw 6.4 Hualien earthquake M. Lee et al. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40562-026-00464-3